Uddhav Thackeray vs Eknath Shinde : Live Updates From Supreme Court In Shiv Sena Case [March 14]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

14 March 2023 5:53 AM GMT

Live Updates

14 March 2023 9:13 AM GMT
CJI: Therefore, your contention would be disqualification was not attracted. Even assuming that, that is the jurisdiction of the speaker.

Jethmalani: Therefore, what was proposed to be done here was bring in through backdoor, 2(1)(c)...
14 March 2023 9:08 AM GMT
Jethmalani takes the court through the speech of MP Sharad Dighe during the parliamentary debates on 52nd amendment in 1985: Whips merely applies to acts in the house...

CJI: Isn't that on merits? This wouldn't help your cause...
14 March 2023 9:03 AM GMT
Jethmalani: Therefore, if Nabam Rebia is revisited, the decision may be affirmed and put on stronger ground...That is my submission.
14 March 2023 9:01 AM GMT
Jethmalani: A speaker prone to ignoring the notice, as can be seen in this case, can scuttle the entire removal procedure...No ground for distinction b/w A179 and A181 stages. Logically, nemo judex rule must apply to both stages.
14 March 2023 9:01 AM GMT
Jethmalani: Speaker's powers of presiding over the house when a motion for his removal is under consideration. By a parity of reasoning, what applies here should also apply to that 14 day period. He can scuttle members during that time...
14 March 2023 8:57 AM GMT
Jethmalani: ...when speaker who continues to function can use his powers to alter the constituency that would decide his removal...gerrymandering...

What is prevented by Aa 179 or 181? Speaker cannot preside over the house.
14 March 2023 8:57 AM GMT
Jethmalani: Next, A 181 is based on the principle of one not being allowed to be a judge in their own case, i.e., the nemo judex in causa sua rule. No reason why rule should be restricted to consideration of resolution, but not notice...
14 March 2023 8:57 AM GMT
Jethmalani: Next, A 181 is based on the principle of one not being allowed to be a judge in their own case, i.e., the nemo judex in causa sua rule. No reason why rule should be restricted to consideration of resolution, but not notice...
14 March 2023 8:57 AM GMT
CJI: So acc to you, the prohibition (period when speaker is barred from considering disqualification petition) commences the moment a notice is given?

Jethmalani: Yes. And, any misuse is circumscribed by rules of the house.
14 March 2023 8:53 AM GMT
Jethmalani resumes his submissions.

"181 does not prohibit a construction that a deputy speaker cannot act as such deputy speaker from the time when an 179 (c) notice is moved. There is a vacuum b/w 179(c) & 181, filled by Rule 11."

Next Updates Previous Updates

Uddhav Thackeray vs Eknath Shinde : Live Updates From Supreme Court In Shiv Sena Case [March 14]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Live Updates

CJI: Therefore, your contention would be disqualification was not attracted. Even assuming that, that is the jurisdiction of the speaker. Jethmalani: Therefore, what was proposed to be done here was bring in through backdoor, 2(1)(c)...

Jethmalani takes the court through the speech of MP Sharad Dighe during the parliamentary debates on 52nd amendment in 1985: Whips merely applies to acts in the house... CJI: Isn't that on merits? This wouldn't help your cause...

Jethmalani: Therefore, if Nabam Rebia is revisited, the decision may be affirmed and put on stronger ground...That is my submission.

Jethmalani: A speaker prone to ignoring the notice, as can be seen in this case, can scuttle the entire removal procedure...No ground for distinction b/w A179 and A181 stages. Logically, nemo judex rule must apply to both stages.

Jethmalani: Speaker's powers of presiding over the house when a motion for his removal is under consideration. By a parity of reasoning, what applies here should also apply to that 14 day period. He can scuttle members during that time...

Jethmalani: ...when speaker who continues to function can use his powers to alter the constituency that would decide his removal...gerrymandering... What is prevented by Aa 179 or 181? Speaker cannot preside over the house.

Jethmalani: Next, A 181 is based on the principle of one not being allowed to be a judge in their own case, i.e., the nemo judex in causa sua rule. No reason why rule should be restricted to consideration of resolution, but not notice...

Jethmalani: Next, A 181 is based on the principle of one not being allowed to be a judge in their own case, i.e., the nemo judex in causa sua rule. No reason why rule should be restricted to consideration of resolution, but not notice...

CJI: So acc to you, the prohibition (period when speaker is barred from considering disqualification petition) commences the moment a notice is given? Jethmalani: Yes. And, any misuse is circumscribed by rules of the house.

Jethmalani resumes his submissions. "181 does not prohibit a construction that a deputy speaker cannot act as such deputy speaker from the time when an 179 (c) notice is moved. There is a vacuum b/w 179(c) & 181, filled by Rule 11."

Tags

CJI: Therefore, your contention would be disqualification was not attracted. Even assuming that, that is the jurisdiction of the speaker.

Jethmalani: Therefore, what was proposed to be done here was bring in through backdoor, 2(1)(c)...

Jethmalani takes the court through the speech of MP Sharad Dighe during the parliamentary debates on 52nd amendment in 1985: Whips merely applies to acts in the house...

CJI: Isn't that on merits? This wouldn't help your cause...

Jethmalani: ...when speaker who continues to function can use his powers to alter the constituency that would decide his removal...gerrymandering...

What is prevented by Aa 179 or 181? Speaker cannot preside over the house.

CJI: So acc to you, the prohibition (period when speaker is barred from considering disqualification petition) commences the moment a notice is given?

Jethmalani: Yes. And, any misuse is circumscribed by rules of the house.

Jethmalani resumes his submissions.

"181 does not prohibit a construction that a deputy speaker cannot act as such deputy speaker from the time when an 179 (c) notice is moved. There is a vacuum b/w 179(c) & 181, filled by Rule 11."